From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,80ae596d36288e8a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.201.147.78.MISMATCH!feeder.news-service.com!news.netcologne.de!ramfeed1.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 18:10:49 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why no socket package in the standard ?
References: <op.vvyoslycule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <872169864327910446.796089rmhost.bauhaus-maps.arcor.de@news.arcor.de>
 <9cb23235-8824-43f4-92aa-d2e8d10e7d8c@ct4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <4ddb5bd7$0$302$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
 <4ddb81b8$0$7628$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <xazx5pxeo547.154hwuxjjylbs$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ddbc090$0$6582$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <n3mag6awan4j$.1mjwql1dnpgfg.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <n3mag6awan4j$.1mjwql1dnpgfg.dlg@40tude.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4ddbd889$0$6626$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 May 2011 18:10:49 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69d3ebf2.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=>ad`Ikg6GdB[kmHKHnaEnMA9EHlD;3YcB4Fo<]lROoRA8kF<OcfhCOKPhBQN`[]M5Cnc\616M64>JLh>_cHTX3jMi7aGh6oNH2H
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19409
Date: 2011-05-24T18:10:49+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 24.05.11 16:59, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2011 16:28:32 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> 
>> On 24.05.11 14:53, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>
>>> Communication between programs
>>> is distribution, the annex E.
>>
>> Yes.  If the endpoints of communication are Ada partitions.
>> Otherwise ...?
> 
> Non-Ada programs = non-programs. No offence to other languages meant, it is
> just so that we cannot communicate them at this height of abstraction
> level.

But we do have an ORB style of distribution; and since ORBs
can be language neutral, Non-Ada programs might be programs,
again.

>> From a programmer perspective, sockets may well be about
>> how to send a String value to some "Port" on some
>> "machine" identifiable via DNS.
> 
> That is not Ada's programmer perspective.

OK.




>> If these issues are central to Ada programming, and future-proof,
>> there might be funding for isolating a few requirements.  Then start
>> from these requirements.
> 
> From CAN Open, ASAP, ASAM etc? Are you kidding?

No, I mean transport as a concept, considering pay load,
buffers, timeouts, latency; interaction with possible RTSs;
things that matter to programming the level in question.
E.g., is there anything special regarding interrupt handling
when it comes to receiving data?  (Likely not, I think?)



>> The original question was, "Why no socket package in the standard?".
>>
>> Let me rephrase it: "Why no ISO/IEC 14519:2001 package in the standard?"
> 
> I cannot say. I do not care much about POSIX, maybe, others do not either.
> Why is it relevant to sockets?


http://www.cs.scranton.edu/~beidler/Ada/posix/posix-sockets-internet.html

Or so I thought, at least.